42-Fallacies of Ethics

8/12/2019 42-Fallacies of Ethics

1/60

42

FALLACIES

For Free

Dr. Michael C. LaBossie


2/60

1

FortyTwoFallacies(ForFree)ByDr.MichaelC.LaBossiere,[email protected]

LegalInformation

Thisbook

is

copyright

2002

2010

by

Dr.

Michael

C.

LaBossiere.

It

may

be

freely

distributedforpersonaloreducationaluseprovidedthatitisnotmodifiedandnofee

abovethenormalcostofdistributionischargedforit.

FallaciesandArgumentsInordertounderstandwhatafallacyis,onemustunderstandwhatanargumentis.

Verybrieflyanargumentconsistsofoneormorepremisesandoneconclusion.A

premiseisastatement(asentencethatiseithertrueorfalse)thatisofferedinsupport

oftheclaimbeingmade,whichistheconclusion(whichisalsoasentencethatiseither

trueorfalse).

There

are

two

main

types

of

arguments:

deductive

and

inductive.

A

deductive

argumentisanargumentsuchthatthepremisesprovide(orappeartoprovide)

completesupportfortheconclusion.Aninductiveargumentisanargumentsuchthat

thepremisesprovide(orappeartoprovide)somedegreeofsupport(butlessthan

completesupport)fortheconclusion.Ifthepremisesactuallyprovidetherequired

degreeofsupportfortheconclusion,thentheargumentisagoodone.Agood

deductiveargumentisknownasavalidargumentandissuchthatifallitspremisesare

true,thenitsconclusionmustbetrue.Ifalltheargumentisvalidandactuallyhasall

truepremises,thenitisknownasasoundargument.Ifitisinvalidorhasoneormore

falsepremises,itwillbeunsound.Agoodinductiveargumentisknownasastrong(or

cogent)inductiveargument.Itissuchthatifthepremisesaretrue,theconclusionis

likelyto

be

true.

Afallacyis,verygenerally,anerrorinreasoning.Thisdiffersfromafactualerror,

whichissimplybeingwrongaboutthefacts.Tobemorespecific,afallacyisan

argumentinwhichthepremisesgivenfortheconclusiondonotprovidetheneeded

degreeofsupport.Adeductivefallacyisadeductiveargumentthatisinvalid(itissuch

thatitcouldhavealltruepremisesandstillhaveafalseconclusion).Aninductivefallacy

islessformalthanadeductivefallacy.Theyaresimplyargumentswhichappeartobe

inductivearguments,butthepremisesdonotprovidedenoughsupportforthe

conclusion.Insuchcases,evenifthepremisesweretrue,theconclusionwouldnotbe

morelikelytobetrue.

ExampleofaDeductiveArgument

Premise1:IfBillisacat,thenBillisamammal.

Premise2:Billisacat.

Conclusion:Billisamammal.


3/60

2

ExampleofanInductiveArgument

Premise1:MostAmericancatsaredomestichousecats.

Premise2:BillisanAmericancat.

Conclusion:Billisdomestichousecat.

Exampleof

aFactual

Error

ColumbusisthecapitaloftheUnitedStates.

ExampleofaDeductiveFallacy

Premise1:IfPortlandisthecapitalofMaine,thenitisinMaine.

Premise2:PortlandisinMaine.

Conclusion:PortlandisthecapitalofMaine.

(PortlandisinMaine,butAugustaisthecapital.PortlandisthelargestcityinMaine,

though.)

ExampleofanInductiveFallacy

Premise1:HavingjustarrivedinOhio,Isawawhitesquirrel.

Conclusion:AllOhiosquirrelsarewhite.

(Whiletherearemany,manysquirrelsinOhio,thewhiteonesareveryrare).

FallaciesAdHominemAlsoKnownas:AdHominemAbusive,PersonalAttack

Description:

TranslatedfromLatintoEnglish,adHominemmeansagainstthemanoragainst

theperson.

AnadHominemisageneralcategoryoffallaciesinwhichaclaimorargumentis

rejectedonthebasisofsomeirrelevantfactabouttheauthorofortheperson

presentingtheclaimorargument.Typically,thisfallacyinvolvestwosteps.First,an

attackagainstthecharacterofpersonmakingtheclaim,hercircumstances,orher

actionsismade(orthecharacter,circumstances,oractionsofthepersonreportingthe

claim).Second,thisattackistakentobeevidenceagainsttheclaimorargumentthe

personinquestionismaking(orpresenting).Thistypeofargumenthasthefollowing

form:

1.Person

A

makes

claim

X.

2.PersonBmakesanattackonpersonA.

3.ThereforeAsclaimisfalse.

ThereasonwhyanadHominem(ofanykind)isafallacyisthatthecharacter,

circumstances,oractionsofapersondonot(inmostcases)haveabearingonthetruth

orfalsityoftheclaimbeingmade(orthequalityoftheargumentbeingmade).


4/60

3

Example#1:

Bill:Ibelievethatabortionismorallywrong.

Dave:Ofcourseyouwouldsaythat,youreapriest.

Bill:WhatabouttheargumentsIgavetosupportmyposition?

Dave:Thosedontcount.LikeIsaid,youreapriest,soyouhavetosaythatabortionis

wrong.Further,

you

are

just

alackey

to

the

Pope,

so

Icant

believe

what

you

say.

Example#2:

John:Sallywassayingthatpeopleshouldnthuntanimalsorkillthemforfoodor

clothing.Shealso

Wanda:Well,Sallyisasissycrybabywholovesanimalswaytoomuch.

John:So?

Wanda:Thatmeanssheiswrongaboutthatanimalstuff.Also,ifwewerentsupposed

toeatem,theywouldntbemadeofmeat.

Ad

Hominem

Tu

Quoque

AlsoKnownas:YouTooFallacy

Description:

Thisfallacyiscommittedwhenitisconcludedthatapersonsclaimisfalsebecause1)

itisinconsistentwithsomethingelseapersonhassaidor2)whatapersonsaysis

inconsistentwithheractions.Thistypeofargumenthasthefollowingform:

1.PersonAmakesclaimX.

2.PersonBassertsthatAsactionsorpastclaimsareinconsistentwiththetruthof

claimX.

3.ThereforeXisfalse.

Thefactthatapersonmakesinconsistentclaimsdoesnotmakeanyparticularclaim

hemakesfalse(althoughofanypairofinconsistentclaimsonlyonecanbetruebut

bothcanbefalse).Also,thefactthatapersonsclaimsarenotconsistentwithhis

actionsmightindicatethatthepersonisahypocritebutthisdoesnotprovehisclaims

arefalse.

Example#1:

Bill:Smokingisveryunhealthyandleadstoallsortsofproblems.Sotakemyadviceand

neverstart.

Jill:Well,

Icertainly

dont

want

to

get

cancer.

Bill:Imgoingtogetasmoke.WanttojoinmeDave?

Jill:Well,Iguesssmokingcantbethatbad.Afterall,Billsmokes.

Example#2:

Jill:Ithinktheguncontrolbillshouldntbesupportedbecauseitwontbeeffectiveand

willwastemoney.

Bill:Well,justlastmonthyousupportedthebill.SoIguessyourewrongnow.


5/60

4

Example#3:

Peter:BasedontheargumentsIhavepresented,itisevidentthatitismorallywrongto

useanimalsforfoodorclothing.

Bill:Butyouarewearingaleatherjacketandyouhavearoastbeefsandwichinyour

hand!How

can

you

say

that

using

animals

for

food

and

clothing

is

wrong!

AppealtotheConsequencesofaBeliefDescription:

TheAppealtotheConsequencesofaBeliefisafallacythatcomesinthefollowing

patterns:

#1:XistruebecauseifpeopledidnotacceptXasbeingtrue,thentherewouldbe

negativeconsequences.

#2:

X

is

false

because

if

people

did

not

accept

X

as

being

false,

then

there

would

be

negativeconsequences.

#3:XistruebecauseacceptingthatXistruehaspositiveconsequences.

#4:XisfalsebecauseacceptingthatXisfalsehaspositiveconsequences.

#5:IwishthatXweretrue,thereforeXistrue.ThisisknownasWishfulThinking.

#6:IwishthatXwerefalse,thereforeXisfalse.ThisisknownasWishfulThinking.

Thisline

of

reasoning

is

fallacious

because

the

consequences

of

abelief

have

no

bearingonwhetherthebeliefistrueorfalse.Forexample,ifsomeoneweretosayIf

sixteenheadedpurpleunicornsdontexist,thenIwouldbemiserable,sotheymust

exist,itwouldbeclearthatthiswouldnotbeagoodlineofreasoning.Itisimportant

tonotethattheconsequencesinquestionaretheconsequencesthatstemfromthe

belief.Itisimportanttodistinguishbetweenarationalreasontobelieve(RRB)

(evidence)andaprudentialreasontobelieve(PRB)(motivation).ARRBisevidencethat

objectivelyandlogicallysupportstheclaim.APRBisareasontoacceptthebelief

becauseofsomeexternalfactor(suchasfear,athreat,orabenefitorharmthatmay

stemfromthebelief)thatisrelevanttowhatapersonvaluesbutisnotrelevanttothe

truthor

falsity

of

the

claim.

ThenatureofthefallacyisespeciallyclearinthecaseofWishfulthinking.Obviously,

merelywishingthatsomethingistruedoesnotmakeittrue.Thisfallacydiffersfromthe

AppealtoBelieffallacyinthattheAppealtoBeliefinvolvestakingaclaimthatmost

peoplebelievethatXistruetobeevidenceforXbeingtrue.


6/60

5

Example#1:

Godmustexist!IfGoddidnotexist,thenallbasisformoralitywouldbelostandthe

worldwouldbeahorribleplace!

Example#2:

Itcan

never

happen

to

me.

If

Ibelieved

it

could,

Icould

never

sleep

soundly

at

night.

Example#3:

Idontthinkthattherewillbeanuclearwar.IfIbelievedthat,Iwouldntbeabletoget

upinthemorning.Imean,howdepressing.

Example#4:

IacknowledgethatIhavenoargumentfortheexistenceofGod.However,Ihaveagreat

desireforGodtoexistandfortheretobeanafterlife.ThereforeIacceptthatGod

exists.

AppealtoAuthorityAlsoKnownas:FallaciousAppealtoAuthority,MisuseofAuthority,Irrelevant

Authority,QuestionableAuthority,InappropriateAuthority,AdVerecundiam

Description:

AnAppealtoAuthorityisafallacywiththefollowingform:

1)PersonAis(claimedtobe)anauthorityonsubjectS.

2)PersonAmakesclaimCaboutsubjectS.

3)Therefore,Cistrue.

Thisfallacy

is

committed

when

the

person

in

question

is

not

alegitimate

authority

on

thesubject.Moreformally,ifpersonAisnotqualifiedtomakereliableclaimsinsubject

S,thentheargumentwillbefallacious.

Thissortofreasoningisfallaciouswhenthepersoninquestionisnotanexpert.In

suchcasesthereasoningisflawedbecausethefactthatanunqualifiedpersonmakesa

claimdoesnotprovideanyjustificationfortheclaim.Theclaimcouldbetrue,butthe

factthatanunqualifiedpersonmadetheclaimdoesnotprovideanyrationalreasonto

accepttheclaimastrue.

Whenapersonfallspreytothisfallacy,theyareacceptingaclaimastruewithout

therebeingadequateevidencetodoso.Morespecifically,thepersonisacceptingthe

claimbecause

they

erroneously

believe

that

the

person

making

the

claim

is

alegitimate

expertandhencethattheclaimisreasonabletoaccept.Sincepeoplehaveatendency

tobelieveauthorities(andthereare,infact,goodreasonstoacceptsomeclaimsmade

byauthorities)thisfallacyisafairlycommonone.

Sincethissortofreasoningisfallaciousonlywhenthepersonisnotalegitimate

authorityinaparticularcontext,itisnecessarytoprovidesomeacceptablestandardsof

assessment.Thefollowingstandardsarewidelyaccepted:


7/60

6

1.Thepersonhassufficientexpertiseinthesubjectmatterinquestion.Claimsmadebyapersonwholackstheneededdegreeofexpertisetomakeareliable

claimwill,obviously,notbewellsupported.Incontrast,claimsmadebyapersonwith

theneededdegreeofexpertisewillbesupportedbythepersonsreliabilityinthearea.

Determiningwhetherornotapersonhastheneededdegreeofexpertisecanoftenbe

verydifficult.

In

academic

fields

(such

as

philosophy,

engineering,

history,

etc.),

the

personsformaleducation,academicperformance,publications,membershipin

professionalsocieties,paperspresented,awardswonandsoforthcanallbereliable

indicatorsofexpertise.Outsideofacademicfields,otherstandardswillapply.For

example,havingsufficientexpertisetomakeareliableclaimabouthowtotieashoe

laceonlyrequirestheabilitytotietheshoelaceandimpartthatinformationtoothers.

Itshouldbenotedthatbeinganexpertdoesnotalwaysrequirehavingauniversity

degree.Manypeoplehavehighdegreesofexpertiseinsophisticatedsubjectswithout

havingeverattendedauniversity.Further,itshouldnotbesimplyassumedthata

personwithadegreeisanexpert.

Ofcourse,whatisrequiredtobeanexpertisoftenamatterofgreatdebate.For

example,somepeoplehave(anddo)claimexpertiseincertain(evenall)areasbecause

ofadivineinspirationoraspecialgift.Thefollowersofsuchpeopleacceptsuch

credentialsasestablishingthepersonsexpertisewhileothersoftenseetheseself

proclaimedexpertsasdeludedorevenascharlatans.Inothersituations,peopledebate

overwhatsortofeducationandexperienceisneededtobeanexpert.Thus,whatone

personmaytaketobeafallaciousappealanotherpersonmighttaketobeawell

supportedlineofreasoning.Fortunately,manycasesdonotinvolvesuchdebate.

2.Theclaimbeingmadebythepersoniswithinherarea(s)ofexpertise.Ifapersonmakesaclaimaboutsomesubjectoutsideofhisarea(s)ofexpertise,then

theperson

is

not

an

expert

in

that

context.

Hence,

the

claim

in

question

is

not

backed

by

therequireddegreeofexpertiseandisnotreliable.

Itisveryimportanttorememberthatbecauseofthevastscopeofhumanknowledge

andskillitissimplynotpossibleforonepersontobeanexpertoneverything.Hence,

expertswillonlybetrueexpertsinrespecttocertainsubjectareas.Inmostotherareas

theywillhavelittleornoexpertise.Thus,itisimportanttodeterminewhatsubjectarea

aclaimfallsunder.

Itisalsoveryimportanttonotethatexpertiseinoneareadoesnotautomatically

conferexpertiseinanother.Forexample,beinganexpertphysicistdoesnot

automaticallymakeapersonanexpertonmoralityorpolitics.Unfortunately,thisis

often

overlooked

or

intentionally

ignored.

In

fact,

a

great

deal

of

advertising

rests

on

a

violationofthiscondition.Asanyonewhowatchestelevisionknows,itisextremely

commontogetfamousactorsandsportsheroestoendorseproductsthattheyarenot

qualifiedtoassess.Forexample,apersonmaybeagreatactor,butthatdoesnot

automaticallymakehimanexpertoncarsorshavingorunderwearordietsorpolitics.


8/60

7

3.Thereisanadequatedegreeofagreementamongtheotherexpertsinthesubjectinquestion.Ifthereisasignificantamountoflegitimatedisputeamongtheexpertswithina

subject,thenitwillfallacioustomakeanAppealtoAuthorityusingthedisputing

experts.Thisisbecauseforalmostanyclaimbeingmadeandsupportedbyoneexpert

therewill

be

acounterclaim

that

is

made

and

supported

by

another

expert.

In

such

casesanAppealtoAuthoritywouldtendtobefutile.Insuchcases,thedisputehastobe

settledbyconsiderationoftheactualissuesunderdispute.Sinceeithersideinsucha

disputecaninvokeexperts,thedisputecannotberationallysettledbyAppealsto

Authority.

Therearemanyfieldsinwhichthereisasignificantamountoflegitimatedispute.

Economicsisagoodexampleofsuchadisputedfield.Anyonewhoisfamiliarwith

economicsknowsthattherearemanyplausibletheoriesthatareincompatiblewithone

another.Becauseofthis,oneexperteconomistcouldsincerelyclaimthatthedeficitis

thekeyfactorwhileanotherequallyqualifiedindividualcouldasserttheexactopposite.

Anotherareawheredisputeisverycommon(andwellknown)isintheareaof

psychologyandpsychiatry.Ashasbeendemonstratedinvarioustrials,itispossibleto

findoneexpertthatwillassertthatanindividualisinsaneandnotcompetenttostand

trialandtofindanotherequallyqualifiedexpertwhowilltestify,underoath,thatthe

sameindividualisbothsaneandcompetenttostandtrial.Obviously,onecannotrelyon

anAppealtoAuthorityinsuchasituationwithoutmakingafallaciousargument.Such

anargumentwouldbefallacioussincetheevidencewouldnotwarrantacceptingthe

conclusion.

Itisimportanttokeepinmindthatnofieldhascompleteagreement,sosomedegree

ofdisputeisacceptable.Howmuchisacceptableis,ofcourse,amatterofserious

debate.Itisalsoimportanttokeepinmindthatevenafieldwithagreatdealofinternal

disputemight

contain

areas

of

significant

agreement.

In

such

cases,

an

Appeal

to

Authoritycouldbelegitimate.

4.Thepersoninquestionisnotsignificantlybiased.Ifanexpertissignificantlybiasedthentheclaimshemakeswithinhisareofbiaswill

belessreliable.Sinceabiasedexpertwillnotbereliable,anArgumentfromAuthority

basedonabiasedexpertwillbefallacious.Thisisbecausetheevidencewillnotjustify

acceptingtheclaim.

Experts,beingpeople,arevulnerabletobiasesandprejudices.Ifthereisevidencethat

apersonisbiasedinsomemannerthatwouldaffectthereliabilityofherclaims,thenan

Argument

from

Authority

based

on

that

person

is

likely

to

be

fallacious.

Even

if

the

claim

isactuallytrue,thefactthattheexpertisbiasedweakenstheargument.Thisisbecause

therewouldbereasontobelievethattheexpertmightnotbemakingtheclaimbecause

hehascarefullyconsidereditusinghisexpertise.Rather,therewouldbereasonto

believethattheclaimisbeingmadebecauseoftheexpertsbiasorprejudice.

Itisimportanttorememberthatnopersoniscompletelyobjective.Attheveryleast,a

personwillbefavorabletowardsherownviews(otherwiseshewouldprobablynothold

them).Becauseofthis,somedegreeofbiasmustbeaccepted,providedthatthebiasis


9/60

8

notsignificant.Whatcountsasasignificantdegreeofbiasisopentodisputeandcan

varyagreatdealfromcasetocase.Forexample,manypeoplewouldprobablysuspect

thatdoctorswhowerepaidbytobaccocompaniestoresearchtheeffectsofsmoking

wouldbebiasedwhileotherpeoplemightbelieve(orclaim)thattheywouldbeableto

remainobjective.

5.Theareaofexpertiseisalegitimateareaordiscipline.Certainareasinwhichapersonmayclaimexpertisemayhavenolegitimacyorvalidity

asareasofknowledgeorstudy.Obviously,claimsmadeinsuchareaswillnotbevery

reliable.

Whatcountsasalegitimateareaofexpertiseissometimesdifficulttodetermine.

However,therearecaseswhicharefairlyclearcut.Forexample,ifapersonclaimedto

beanexpertatsomethinghecalledchromabullettherapyandassertedthatfiring

paintedriflebulletsatapersonwouldcurecanceritwouldnotbeveryreasonableto

accepthisclaimbasedonhisexpertise.Afterall,hisexpertiseisinanareawhichis

devoidoflegitimatecontent.Thegeneralideaisthattobealegitimateexpertaperson

musthavemasteryoverarealfieldorareaofknowledge.

Asnotedabove,determiningthelegitimacyofafieldcanoftenbedifficult.In

Europeanhistory,variousscientistshadtostrugglewiththeChurchandestablished

traditionstoestablishthevalidityoftheirdisciplines.Forexample,expertsonevolution

facedanuphillbattleingettingthelegitimacyoftheirareaaccepted.

Amodernexampleinvolvespsychicphenomenon.Somepeopleclaimthattheyare

certifiedmasterpsychicsandthattheyareactuallyexpertsinthefield.Otherpeople

contendthattheirclaimsofbeingcertifiedmasterpsychicsaresimplyabsurdsince

thereisnorealcontenttosuchanareaofexpertise.Ifthesepeopleareright,then

anyonewhoacceptstheclaimsofthesemasterpsychicsastruearevictimsofa

fallaciousappeal

to

authority.

6.Theauthorityinquestionmustbeidentified.AcommonvariationofthetypicalAppealtoAuthorityfallacyisanAppealtoan

UnnamedAuthority.ThisfallacyisAlsoKnownasanAppealtoanUnidentified

Authority.

Thisfallacyiscommittedwhenapersonassertsthataclaimistruebecauseanexpert

orauthoritymakestheclaimandthepersondoesnotactuallyidentifytheexpert.Since

theexpertisnotnamedoridentified,thereisnowaytotellifthepersonisactuallyan

expert.Unlessthepersonisidentifiedandhashisexpertiseestablished,thereisno

reason

to

accept

the

claim.

Thissortofreasoningisnotunusual.Typically,thepersonmakingtheargumentwill

saythingslikeIhaveabookthatsays,ortheysay,ortheexpertssay,or

scientistsbelievethat,orIreadinthepaper..orIsawonTVorsomesimilar

statement.insuchcasesthepersonisoftenhopingthatthelistener(s)willsimplyaccept

theunidentifiedsourceasalegitimateauthorityandbelievetheclaimbeingmade.Ifa

personacceptstheclaimsimplybecausetheyaccepttheunidentifiedsourceasan

expert(withoutgoodreasontodoso),hehasfallenpreytothisfallacy.


10/60

9

NonFallaciousAppealstoAuthority

Assuggestedabove,notallAppealstoAuthorityarefallacious.Thisisfortunatesince

peoplehavetorelyonexperts.Thisisbecausenoonepersoncanbeanexperton

everythingandpeopledonothavethetimeorabilitytoinvestigateeverysingleclaim

themselves.

Inmanycases,ArgumentsfromAuthoritywillbegoodarguments.Forexample,when

apersongoestoaskilleddoctorandthedoctortellshimthathehasacold,thenthe

patienthasgoodreasontoacceptthedoctorsconclusion.Asanotherexample,ifa

personscomputerisactingoddandhisfriend,whoisacomputerexpert,tellshimitis

probablyhisharddrivethenhehasgoodreasontobelieveher.

WhatdistinguishesafallaciousAppealtoAuthorityfromagoodAppealtoAuthorityis

thattheargumentmeetsthesixconditionsdiscussedabove.

InagoodAppealtoAuthority,thereisreasontobelievetheclaimbecausetheexpert

saystheclaimistrue.Thisisbecauseapersonwhoisalegitimateexpertismorelikely

toberightthanwrongwhenmakingconsideredclaimswithinherareaofexpertise.Ina

sense,theclaimisbeingacceptedbecauseitisreasonabletobelievethattheexperthas

testedtheclaimandfoundittobereliable.So,iftheexperthasfoundittobereliable,

thenitisreasonabletoacceptitasbeingtrue.Thus,thelistenerisacceptingaclaim

basedonthetestimonyoftheexpert.

ItshouldbenotedthatevenagoodAppealtoAuthorityisnotanexceptionallystrong

argument.Afterall,insuchcasesaclaimisbeingacceptedastruesimplybecausea

personisassertingthatitistrue.Thepersonmaybeanexpert,butherexpertisedoes

notreallybearonthetruthoftheclaim.Thisisbecausetheexpertiseofapersondoes

notactuallydeterminewhethertheclaimistrueorfalse.Hence,argumentsthatdeal

directlywithevidencerelatingtotheclaimitselfwilltendtobestronger.

Example#1:

BillandJanearearguingaboutthemoralityofabortion:

Bill:Ibelievethatabortionismorallyacceptable.Afterall,awomanshouldhavearight

toherownbody.

Jane:Idisagreecompletely.Dr.JohanSkarnsaysthatabortionisalwaysmorallywrong,

regardlessofthesituation.Hehastoberight,afterall,heisarespectedexpertinhis

field.

Bill:IveneverheardofDr.Skarn.Whoishe?

Jane:

Hes

the

guy

that

won

the

Nobel

Prize

in

physics

for

his

work

on

cold

fusion.

Bill:Isee.Doeshehaveanyexpertiseinmoralityorethics?

Jane:Idontknow.Buthesaworldfamousexpert,soIbelievehim.

Example#2:

DaveandKintaroarearguingaboutStalinsreignintheSovietUnion.Davehasbeen

arguingthatStalinwasagreatleaderwhileKintarodisagreeswithhim.


11/60

10

Kintaro:IdontseehowyoucanconsiderStalintobeagreatleader.Hekilledmillions

ofhisownpeople,hecrippledtheSovieteconomy,keptmostofthepeopleinfearand

laidthefoundationsfortheviolencethatisoccurringinmuchofEasternEurope.

Dave:Yeah,wellyousaythat.However,IhaveabookathomethatsaysthatStalinwas

actinginthebestinterestofthepeople.Themillionsthatwerekilledwerevicious

enemiesof

the

state

and

they

had

to

be

killed

to

protect

the

rest

of

the

peaceful

citizens.Thisbooklaysitallout,soithastobetrue.

Example#3:

Imnotadoctor,butIplayoneonthehitseriesBimbosandStudmuffinsintheOR.

Youcantakeitfrommethatwhenyouneedafastacting,effectiveandsafepainkiller

thereisnothingbetterthanMorphiDope2000.Thatismyconsideredmedicalopinion.

Example#4:

SiphweandSashaarehavingaconversation:

Sasha:IplayedthelotterytodayandIknowIamgoingtowinsomething.

Siphwe:Whatdidyoudo,rigtheoutcome?

Sasha:No,silly.IcalledmySuperPsychicBuddyatthe1900MindPowernumber.

AfterconsultinghismagicCalifornianTarotdeck,hetoldmemyluckynumbers.

Siphwe:Andyoubelievedhim?

Sasha:Certainly,heisacertifiedCalifornianMasterMindPsychic.ThatiswhyIbelieve

whathehastosay.Imean,like,whoelsewouldknowwhatmyluckynumbersare?

AppealtoBeliefDescription:AppealtoBeliefisafallacythathasthisgeneralpattern:

1)Most

people

believe

that

aclaim,

X,

is

true.

2)ThereforeXistrue.

Thislineofreasoningisfallaciousbecausethefactthatmanypeoplebelieveaclaim

doesnot,ingeneral,serveasevidencethattheclaimistrue.

Thereare,however,somecaseswhenthefactthatmanypeopleacceptaclaimas

trueisanindicationthatitistrue.Forexample,whileyouarevisitingMaine,youare

toldbyseveralpeoplethattheybelievethatpeopleolderthan16needtobuyafishing

licenseinordertofish.Barringreasonstodoubtthesepeople,theirstatementsgiveyou

reasontobelievethatanyoneover16willneedtobuyafishinglicense.

Thereare

also

cases

in

which

what

people

believe

actually

determines

the

truth

of

aclaim.Forexample,thetruthofclaimsaboutmannersandproperbehaviormight

simplydependonwhatpeoplebelievetobegoodmannersandproperbehavior.

Anotherexampleisthecaseofcommunitystandards,whichareoftentakentobethe

standardsthatmostpeopleaccept.Insomecases,whatviolatescertaincommunity

standardsistakentobeobscene.Insuchcases,fortheclaimxisobscenetobetrueis

formostpeopleinthatcommunitytobelievethatxisobscene.Insuchcasesitisstill

prudenttoquestionthejustificationoftheindividualbeliefs.


12/60

11

Example#1:

Atonetime,mostpeopleinEuropebelievedthattheearthwasthecenterofthesolar

system(atleastmostofthosewhohadbeliefsaboutsuchthings).However,thisbelief

turnedouttobefalse.

Example#2:

Godmustexist.Afterall,Ijustsawapollthatsays85%ofallAmericansbelieveinGod.

Example#3:

Ofcoursethereisnothingwrongwithdrinking.Askanyone,helltellyouthathethinks

drinkingisjustfine.

AppealtoCommonPracticeDescription:

TheAppeal

to

Common

Practice

is

afallacy

with

the

following

structure:

1)Xisacommonaction.

2)ThereforeXiscorrect/moral/justified/reasonable,etc.

ThebasicideabehindthefallacyisthatthefactthatmostpeopledoXisusedas

evidencetosupporttheactionorpractice.Itisafallacybecausethemerefactthat

mostpeopledosomethingdoesnotmakeitcorrect,moral,justified,orreasonable.

Anappealtofairplay,whichmightseemtobeanappealtocommonpractice,need

notbeafallacy.Forexample,awomanworkinginanofficemightsaythemenwhodo

thesame

job

as

me

get

paid

more

than

Ido,

so

it

would

be

right

for

me

to

get

paid

the

sameasthem.Thiswouldnotbeafallacyaslongastherewasnorelevantdifference

betweenherandthemen(intermsofability,experience,hoursworked,etc.).More

formally:

1)ItiscommonpracticetotreatpeopleoftypeYinmannerXandtotreatpeopleof

typeZinadifferentmanner.

2)ThereisnorelevantdifferencebetweenpeopleoftypeYandtypeZ.

3)ThereforepeopleoftypeZshouldbetreatedinmannerX,too.

Thisargumentrestsheavilyontheprincipleofrelevantdifference.Onthisprinciple

twopeople,

A

and

B,

can

only

be

treated

differently

if

and

only

if

there

is

arelevant

differencebetweenthem.Forexample,itwouldbefineformetogiveabettergradeto

AthanBifAdidbetterworkthanB.However,itwouldbewrongofmetogiveAa

bettergradethanBsimplybecauseAhasredhairandBhasblondehair.

TheremightbesomecasesinwhichthefactthatmostpeopleacceptXasmoral

entailsthatXismoral.Forexample,oneviewofmoralityisthatmoralityisrelativeto


13/60

12

thepracticesofaculture,time,person,etc.Ifwhatismoralisdeterminedbywhatis

commonlypracticed,thenthisargument:

1)MostpeopledoX.

2)ThereforeXismorallycorrect.

wouldnotbeafallacy.Thiswouldhoweverentailsomeoddresults.Forexample,

imaginethatthereareonly100peopleonearth.60ofthemdonotstealorcheatand

40do.Atthistime,stealingandcheatingwouldbewrong.Thenextday,anatural

disasterkills30ofthe60peoplewhodonotcheatorsteal.Nowitismorallycorrectto

cheatandsteal.Thus,itwouldbepossibletochangethemoralorderoftheworldto

onesviewsimplybyeliminatingthosewhodisagree.

Example#1:

DirectorJonesisinchargeofrunningastatewastemanagementprogram.Whenitis

foundthattheprogramisrifewithcorruption,JonessaysThisprogramhasits

problems,butnothinggoesoninthisprogramthatdoesntgooninallstateprograms.

Example#2:

Yeah,Iknowsomepeoplesaythatcheatingontestsiswrong.Butweallknowthat

everyonedoesit,soitsokay.

Example#3:

Sure,somepeoplebuyintothatequalitycrap.However,weknowthateveryonepays

womenlessthenmen.Itsokay,too.Sinceeveryonedoesit,itcantreallybewrong.

Example#4:

Thereisnothingwrongwithrequiringmulticulturalclasses,evenattheexpenseofcore

subjects.Afterall,alloftheuniversitiesandcollegesarepushingmulticulturalism.

AppealtoEmotionDescription:

AnAppealtoEmotionisafallacywiththefollowingstructure:

1)FavorableemotionsareassociatedwithX.

2)Therefore,

Xis

true.

Thisfallacyiscommittedwhensomeonemanipulatespeoplesemotionsinorderto

getthemtoacceptaclaimasbeingtrue.Moreformally,thissortofreasoning

involvesthesubstitutionofvariousmeansofproducingstrongemotionsinplaceof

evidenceforaclaim.IfthefavorableemotionsassociatedwithXinfluencethepersonto

acceptXastruebecausetheyfeelgoodaboutX,thenhehasfallenpreytothefallacy.


14/60

13

Thissortofreasoningisverycommoninpoliticsanditservesasthebasisforalarge

portionofmodernadvertising.Mostpoliticalspeechesareaimedatgeneratingfeelings

inpeoplesothatthesefeelingswillgetthemtovoteoractacertainway.Inthecaseof

advertising,thecommercialsareaimedatevokingemotionsthatwillinfluencepeople

tobuycertainproducts.Inmostcases,suchspeechesandcommercialsarenotoriously

freeof

real

evidence.

Thissortofreasoningisquiteevidentlyfallacious.Itisfallaciousbecauseusing

varioustacticstoinciteemotionsinpeopledoesnotserveasevidenceforaclaim.For

example,ifapersonwereabletoinspireinapersonanincrediblehatredoftheclaim

that1+1=2andtheninspiredthepersontolovetheclaimthat1+1=3,itwouldhardly

followthattheclaimthat1+1=3wouldbeadequatelysupported.

Itshouldbenotedthatinmanycasesitisnotparticularlyobviousthattheperson

committingthefallacyisattemptingtosupportaclaim.Inmanycases,theuserofthe

fallacywillappeartobeattemptingtomovepeopletotakeanaction,suchasbuyinga

productorfightinginawar.However,itispossibletodeterminewhatsortofclaimthe

personisactuallyattemptingtosupport.Insuchcasesoneneedstoaskwhatsortof

claimisthispersonattemptingtogetpeopletoacceptandacton?Determiningthis

claim(orclaims)mighttakesomework.However,inmanycasesitwillbequiteevident.

Forexample,ifapoliticalleaderisattemptingtoconvinceherfollowerstoparticipatein

certainactsofviolencebytheuseofahatespeech,thenherclaimwouldbeyou

shouldparticipateintheseactsofviolence.Inthiscase,theevidencewouldbethe

hatredevokedinthefollowers.Thishatredwouldservetomakethemfavorable

inclinedtowardstheclaimthattheyshouldengageintheactsofviolence.Asanother

example,abeercommercialmightshowhappy,scantilycladmenandwomenprancing

aboutabeach,guzzlingbeer.Inthiscasetheclaimwouldbeyoushouldbuythisbeer.

Theevidencewouldbetheexcitementevokedbyseeingthebeautifulpeopleguzzling

thebeer.

Thisfallacyisactuallyanextremelyeffectivepersuasivedevice.Asmanypeoplehave

argued,peoplesemotionsoftencarrymuchmoreforcethantheirreason.Logical

argumentationisoftendifficultandtimeconsuminganditrarelyhasthepowertospurn

peopletoaction.Itisthepowerofthisfallacythatexplainsitsgreatpopularityandwide

usage.However,itisstillafallacy.

Inallfairnessitmustbenotedthattheuseoftacticstoinspireemotionsisan

importantskill.Withoutanappealtopeoplesemotions,itisoftendifficulttogetthem

totakeactionortoperformattheirbest.Forexample,nogoodcoachpresentsher

teamwithsyllogismsbeforethebiggame.Insteadsheinspiresthemwithemotional

terms

and

attempts

to

fire

them

up.

There

is

nothing

inherently

wrong

with

this.

However,itisnotanyacceptableformofargumentation.Aslongasoneisableto

clearlydistinguishbetweenwhatinspiresemotionsandwhatjustifiesaclaim,oneis

unlikelytofallpreytothisfallacy.

Asafinalpoint,inmanycasesitwillbedifficulttodistinguishanAppealtoEmotion

fromsomeotherfallaciesandinmanycasesmultiplefallaciesmaybecommitted.For

example,manyAdHominemswillbeverysimilartoAppealstoEmotionand,insome

cases,bothfallacieswillbecommitted.Asanexample,aleadermightattempttoinvoke


15/60

14

hatredofapersontoinspirehisfollowerstoacceptthattheyshouldrejectherclaims.

ThesameattackcouldfunctionasanAppealtoEmotionandaPersonalAttack.Inthe

firstcase,theattackwouldbeaimedatmakingthefollowersfeelveryfavorableabout

rejectingherclaims.Inthesecondcase,theattackwouldbeaimedatmakingthe

followersrejectthepersonsclaimsbecauseofsomeperceived(orimagined)defectin

hercharacter.

ThisfallacyisrelatedtotheAppealtoPopularityfallacy.Despitethedifferences

betweenthesetwofallacies,theyarebothunitedbythefactthattheyinvolveappeals

toemotions.Inbothcasesthefallaciesaimatgettingpeopletoacceptclaimsbasedon

howtheyorothersfeelabouttheclaimsandnotbasedonevidencefortheclaims.

Anotherwaytolookatthesetwofallaciesisasfollows

AppealtoPopularity

1)MostpeopleapproveofX.

2)So,IshouldapproveofX,too.

3)SinceIapproveofX,Xmustbetrue.

AppealtoEmotion

1)IapproveofX.

2)Therefore,Xistrue.

Onthisview,inanAppealtoPopularitytheclaimisacceptedbecausemostpeople

approveoftheclaim.InthecaseofanAppealtoEmotiontheclaimisacceptedbecause

theindividualapprovesoftheclaimbecauseoftheemotionofapprovalhefeelsin

regardstotheclaim.

Example#1:

ThenewPowerTangerinecomputergivesyouthepoweryouneed.Ifyoubuyone,

peoplewillenvyyourpower.Theywilllookuptoyouandwishtheywerejustlikeyou.

Youwillknowthetruejoyofpower.TangerinePower.

Example#2:

ThenewUltraSkinnydietwillmakeyoufeelgreat.Nolongerbetroubledbyyour

weight.Enjoytheadmiringstaresoftheoppositesex.Revelinyournewfreedomfrom

fat.

You

will

know

true

happiness

if

you

try

our

diet!

Example#3:

Billgoestohearapoliticianspeak.Thepoliticiantellsthecrowdabouttheevilsofthe

governmentandtheneedtothrowoutthepeoplewhoarecurrentlyinoffice.After

hearingthespeech,Billisfullofhatredforthecurrentpoliticians.Becauseofthis,he

feelsgoodaboutgettingridoftheoldpoliticiansandacceptsthatitistherightthingto

dobecauseofhowhefeels.


16/60

15

AppealtoFearAlsoKnownas:ScareTactics,AppealtoForce,AdBaculumDescription:

TheAppealtoFearisafallacywiththefollowingpattern:

1)Yispresented(aclaimthatisintendedtoproducefear).

2)ThereforeclaimXistrue(aclaimthatisgenerally,butneednotbe,relatedtoYin

somemanner).

Thislineofreasoningisfallaciousbecausecreatingfearinpeopledoesnot

constituteevidenceforaclaim.

Itisimportanttodistinguishbetweenarationalreasontobelieve(RRB)(evidence)

andaprudentialreasontobelieve(PRB)(motivation).ARRBisevidencethatobjectively

andlogicallysupportstheclaim.APRBisareasontoacceptthebeliefbecauseofsome

external

factor

(such

as

fear,

a

threat,

or

a

benefit

or

harm

that

may

stem

from

the

belief)thatisrelevanttowhatapersonvaluesbutisnotrelevanttothetruthorfalsity

oftheclaim.Forexample,itmightbeprudenttonotfailthesonofyourdepartment

chairpersonbecauseyoufearhewillmakelifetoughforyou.However,thisdoesnot

provideevidencefortheclaimthatthesondeservestopasstheclass.

Example#1:

Youknow,ProfessorSmith,IreallyneedtogetanAinthisclass.Idliketostopby

duringyourofficehourslatertodiscussmygrade.Illbeinyourbuildinganyways,

vistingmyfather.Hesyourdean,bytheway.Illseeyoulater.

Example#2:

IdontthinkaRedRyderBBriflewouldmakeagoodpresentforyou.Theyarevery

dangerousandyoullputyoureyeout.Now,dontyouagreethatyoushouldthinkof

anothergiftidea?

Example#3:

YoumustbelievethatGodexists.Afterall,ifyoudonotaccepttheexistenceofGod,

thenyouwillfacethehorrorsofhell.

Example#4:

Youshouldnt

say

such

things

against

multiculturalism!

If

the

chair

heard

what

you

were

saying,youwouldneverreceivetenure.So,youhadjustbetterlearntoacceptthatitis

simplywrongtospeakoutagainstit.


17/60


18/60

17

oldthings.Second,thenotionofprogress(whichseemstohavecome,inpart,fromthe

notionofevolution)impliesthatnewerthingswillbesuperiortoolderthings.Third,

mediaadvertisingoftensendsthemessagethatnewermustbebetter.Becauseofthese

threefactors(andothers)peopleoftenacceptthatanewthing(idea,product,concept,

etc.)mustbebetterbecauseitisnew.Hence,Noveltyisasomewhatcommonfallacy,

especiallyin

advertising.

Itshouldnotbeassumedthatoldthingsmustbebetterthannewthings(seethe

fallacyAppealtoTradition)anymorethanitshouldbeassumedthatnewthingsare

betterthanoldthings.Theageofathingdoesnot,ingeneral,haveanybearingonits

qualityorcorrectness(inthiscontext).

Obviously,agedoeshaveabearinginsomecontexts.Forexample,ifaperson

concludedthathisdayoldmilkwasbetterthanhistwomontholdmilk,hewouldnot

becommittinganAppealtoNovelty.Thisisbecauseinsuchcasesthenewnessofthe

thingisrelevanttoitsquality.Thus,thefallacyiscommittedonlywhenthenewnessis

not,inandofitself,relevanttotheclaim.

Example#1:

TheSadisike900pumpupglowshoe.Itsbetterbecauseitsnew.

Example#2:

James:So,whatisthisnewplan?

Biff:Well,thelatestthinginmarketingtechniquesistheGKmethod.Itisthelatest

thingoutofthethinktank.Itissonewthattheinkonthereportsisstilldrying.

James:Well,ouroldmarketingmethodhasbeenquiteeffective.Idontliketheideaof

jumpingtoanewmethodwithoutagoodreason.

Biff:Well,weknowthatwehavetostayonthecuttingedge.Thatmeansnewideas

andnew

techniques

have

to

be

used.

The

GK

method

is

new,

so

it

will

do

better

than

thatold,dustymethod.

Example#3:

Prof:Soyoucanseethatanewandbettermoralityissweepingthenation.Nolonger

arepeoplewithalternativelifestylesashamed.Nolongerarepeoplecaughtupinthe

outmodedmoralitiesofthepast.

Student:Well,whatabouttheideasofthegreatthinkersofthepast?Donttheyhave

somevalidpoints?

Prof:Agoodquestion.Theansweristhattheyhadsomevalidpointsintheirown,

barbaric

times.

But

those

are

old,

moldy

moralities

from

a

time

long

gone.

Now

is

a

time

fornewmoralities.Progressandallthat,youknow.

Student:Sowouldyousaythatthenewmoralitiesarebetterbecausetheyare

newer?

Prof:Exactly.Justasthedinosaursdiedofftomakewayfornewanimals,theoldideas

havetogivewayforthenewones.Andjustashumansarebetterthandinosaurs,the

newideasarebetterthantheold.Sonewerisliterallybetter.

Student:Isee.


19/60

18

AppealtoPityAlsoKnownas:AdMisericordiam

Description:

AnAppealtoPityisafallacyinwhichapersonsubstitutesaclaimintendedtocreate

pityfor

evidence

in

an

argument.

The

form

of

the

argument

is

as

follows:

1.Pispresented,withtheintenttocreatepity.

2.ThereforeclaimCistrue.

Thislineofreasoningisfallaciousbecausepitydoesnotserveasevidencefora

claim.Thisisextremelyclearinthefollowingcase:Youmustacceptthat1+1=46,after

allImdyingWhileyoumaypitymebecauseIamdying,itwouldhardlymakemy

claimtrue.

ThisfallacydiffersfromtheAppealtotheConsequencesofaBelief(ACB).IntheACB

fallacy,

a

person

is

using

the

effects

of

a

belief

as

a

substitute

for

evidence.

In

the

Appeal

toPity,itisthefeelingsofpityorsympathythataresubstitutedforevidence.

Itmustbenotedthattherearecasesinwhichclaimsthatactuallyserveasevidence

alsoevokeafeelingofpity.Insuchcases,thefeelingofpityisstillnotevidence.The

followingisanexampleofacaseinwhichaclaimevokespityandalsoservesas

legitimateevidence:

Professor:Youmissedthemidterm,Bill.

Bill:Iknow.Ithinkyoushouldletmetakethemakeup.

Professor:Why?

Bill:Iwashitbyatruckonthewaytothemidterm.SinceIhadtogototheemergency

roomwith

abroken

leg,

Ithink

Iam

entitled

to

amakeup.

Professor:Imsorryabouttheleg,Bill.Ofcourseyoucanmakeitup.

Theaboveexampledoesnotinvolveafallacy.Whiletheprofessordoesfeelsorryfor

Bill,sheisjustifiedinacceptingBillsclaimthathedeservesamakeup.Afterallgetting

runoverbyatruckwouldbealegitimateexcuseformissingatest.

Example#1:

Jill:Hedbeaterriblecoachfortheteam.

Bill:Hehadhisheartsetonthejob,anditwouldbreakifhedidntgetit.

Jill:I

guess

hell

do

an

adequate

job.

Example#2:

Impositivethatmyworkwillmeetyourrequirements.Ireallyneedthejobsincemy

grandmotherissick


20/60

19

Example#3:

IshouldreceiveanAinthisclass.Afterall,ifIdontgetanAIwontgetthe

fellowshipthatIwant.

AppealtoPopularity

Description:

TheAppealtoPopularityhasthefollowingform:

1)MostpeopleapproveofX(havefavorableemotionstowardsX).

2)ThereforeXistrue.

Thebasicideaisthataclaimisacceptedasbeingtruesimplybecausemostpeopleare

favorablyinclinedtowardstheclaim.Moreformally,thefactthatmostpeoplehave

favorableemotionsassociatedwiththeclaimissubstitutedinplaceofactualevidence

fortheclaim.Apersonfallspreytothisfallacyifheacceptsaclaimasbeingtruesimply

because

most

other

people

approve

of

the

claim.

Itisclearlyfallacioustoaccepttheapprovalofthemajorityasevidenceforaclaim.

Forexample,supposethataskilledspeakermanagedtogetmostpeopletoabsolutely

lovetheclaimthat1+1=3.Itwouldstillnotberationaltoacceptthisclaimsimply

becausemostpeopleapprovedofit.Afterall,mereapprovalisnosubstitutefora

mathematicalproof.Atonetimepeopleapprovedofclaimssuchastheworldisflat,

humanscannotsurviveatspeedsgreaterthan25milesperhour,thesunrevolves

aroundtheearthbutalltheseclaimsturnedouttobefalse.

Thissortofreasoningisquitecommonandcanbequiteaneffectivepersuasive

device.Sincemosthumanstendtoconformwiththeviewsofthemajority,convincinga

personthatthemajorityapprovesofaclaimisoftenaneffectivewaytogethimto

acceptit.

Advertisers

often

use

this

tactic

when

they

attempt

to

sell

products

by

claimingthateveryoneusesandlovestheirproducts.Insuchcasestheyhopethat

peoplewillacceptthe(purported)approvalofothersasagoodreasontobuythe

product.

ThisfallacyisvaguelysimilartosuchfallaciesasAppealtoBeliefandAppealto

CommonPractice.However,inthecaseofanAdPopulumtheappealistothefactthat

mostpeopleapproveofaclaim.InthecaseofanAppealtoBelief,theappealistothe

factthatmostpeoplebelieveaclaim.InthecaseofanAppealtoCommonPractice,the

appealistothefactthatmanypeopletaketheactioninquestion.

ThisfallacyiscloselyrelatedtotheAppealtoEmotionfallacy,asdiscussedintheentry

forthat

fallacy.

Example#1:

MyfellowAmericanstherehasbeensometalkthatthegovernmentisoversteppingits

boundsbyallowingpolicetoenterpeopleshomeswithoutthewarrantstraditionally

requiredbytheConstitution.However,thesearedangeroustimesanddangeroustimes

requireappropriateactions.Ihaveinmyofficethousandsoflettersfrompeoplewholet

meknow,innouncertainterms,thattheyheartilyendorsethewaragainstterrorismin


21/60

20

theseUnitedStates.Becauseofthisoverwhelmingapproval,itisevidentthatthepolice

aredoingtherightthing.

Example#2:

Ireadtheotherdaythatmostpeoplereallylikethenewguncontrollaws.Iwassortof

suspiciousof

them,

but

Iguess

if

most

people

like

them,

then

they

must

be

okay.

Example#3:

JillandJanehavesomeconcernsthattherulestheirsororityhassetareracistin

character.SinceJillisadecentperson,shebringsherconcernsupinthenextmeeting.

Thepresidentofthesororityassuresherthatthereisnothingwrongwiththerules,

sincethemajorityofthesisterslikethem.JaneacceptsthisrulingbutJilldecidesto

leavethesorority.

AppealtoRidicule

Also

Known

as:

Appeal

to

Mockery,

The

Horse

Laugh.

Description:

TheAppealtoRidiculeisafallacyinwhichridiculeormockeryissubstitutedfor

evidenceinanargument.Thislineofreasoninghasthefollowingform:

1.X,whichissomeformofridiculeispresented(typicallydirectedattheclaim).

2.ThereforeclaimCisfalse.

Thissortofreasoningisfallaciousbecausemockingaclaimdoesnotshowthatitis

false.Thisisespeciallyclearinthefollowingexample:1+1=2!Thatsthemostridiculous

thingIhaveeverheard!

Itshouldbenotedthatshowingthataclaimisridiculousthroughtheuseoflegitimate

methods(such

as

anon

fallacious

argument)

can

make

it

reasonable

to

reject

the

claim.

Oneformofthislineofreasoningisknownasareductioadabsurdum(reducingto

absurdity).Inthissortofargument,theideaistoshowthatacontradiction(a

statementthatmustbefalse)oranabsurdresultfollowsfromaclaim.Forexample:

Billclaimsthatamemberofaminoritygroupcannotbearacist.However,thisis

absurd.Thinkaboutthis:whitemalesareaminorityintheworld.GivenBillsclaim,it

wouldfollowthatnowhitemalescouldberacists.Hence,theKlan,Nazis,andwhite

supremacistsarenotracistorganizations.

SincetheclaimthattheKlan,Nazis,andwhitesupremacistsarenotracist

organizationsisclearlyabsurd,itcanbeconcludedthattheclaimthatamemberofa

minoritycannot

be

aracist

is

false.

Example#1:

Suremyworthyopponentclaimsthatweshouldlowertuition,butthatisjust

laughable.


22/60

21

Example#2:

Equalrightsforwomen?Yeah,Illsupportthatwhentheystartpayingfordinnerand

takingoutthetrash!Hahhah!Fetchmeanotherbrewski,Mildred.

Example#3:

Thosecrazy

conservatives!

They

think

astrong

military

is

the

key

to

peace!

Such

fools!

AppealtoSpiteDescription:

TheAppealtoSpiteFallacyisafallacyinwhichspiteissubstitutedforevidencewhen

anargumentismadeagainstaclaim.Thislineofreasoninghasthefollowingform:

1.ClaimXispresentedwiththeintentofgeneratingspite.

2.ThereforeclaimCisfalse(ortrue)

Thissortofreasoningisfallaciousbecauseafeelingofspitedoesnotcountas

evidence

for

or

against

a

claim.

This

is

quite

clear

in

the

following

case:

Bill

claims

that

theearthrevolvesaroundthesun.Butrememberthatdirtytrickhepulledonyoulast

week.Now,doesntmyclaimthatthesunrevolvesaroundtheearthmakesenseto

you?

Ofcourse,therearecasesinwhichaclaimthatevokesafeelingofspiteormalicecan

serveaslegitimateevidence.However,itshouldbenotedthattheactualfeelingsof

maliceorspitearenotevidence.Thefollowingisanexampleofsuchasituation:

Jill:IthinkIllvoteforJanetobetreasurerofNOW.

Vicki:Rememberthetimethatyourpursevanishedatameetinglastyear?

Jill:Yes.

Vicki:Well,

Ijust

found

out

that

she

stole

your

purse

and

stole

some

other

stuff

from

people.

Jill:Imnotvotingforher!

Inthiscase,JillhasagoodreasonnottovoteforJane.Sinceatreasurershouldbe

honest,aknownthiefwouldbeabadchoice.AslongasJillconcludesthatsheshould

voteagainstJanebecausesheisathiefandnotjustoutofspite,herreasoningwould

notbefallacious.

Example#1:

Bill:IthinkthatJanedidagreatjobthisyear.Imgoingtonominateherfortheaward.

Dave:Haveyouforgottenlastyear?Rememberthatshedidntnominateyoulast

year.

Bill:Youreright.Imnotgoingtonominateher.


23/60

22

Example#2:

Jill:IthinkJanesideaisareallygoodoneandwillreallysavealotofmoneyforthe

department.

Bill:Maybe.Rememberhowsheshowedthatyourpaperhadafatalflawwhenyou

readitattheconventionlastyear

Jill:I

had

just

about

forgotten

about

that!

Ithink

Ill

go

with

your

idea

instead.

AppealtoTraditionAlsoKnownas:AppealtotheOld,OldWaysareBest,FallaciousAppealtothePast,

AppealtoAge

Description:

AppealtoTraditionisafallacythatoccurswhenitisassumedthatsomethingisbetter

orcorrectsimplybecauseitisolder,traditional,oralwayshasbeendone.Thissortof

reasoninghasthefollowingform:

1.

X

is

old

or

traditional

2.ThereforeXiscorrectorbetter.

Thissortofreasoningisfallaciousbecausetheageofsomethingdoesnot

automaticallymakeitcorrectorbetterthansomethingnewer.Thisismadequite

obviousbythefollowingexample:Thetheorythatwitchesanddemonscausediseaseis

farolderthanthetheorythatmicroorganismcausediseases.Therefore,thetheory

aboutwitchesanddemonsmustbetrue.

Thissortofreasoningisappealingforavarietyofreasons.First,peopleoftenprefer

tostickwithwhatisolderortraditional.Thisisafairlycommonpsychological

characteristicofpeoplewhichmaystemfromthefactthatpeoplefeelmore

comfortableabout

what

has

been

around

longer.

Second,

sticking

with

things

that

are

olderortraditionalisofteneasierthantestingnewthings.Hence,peopleoftenprefer

olderandtraditionalthingsoutoflaziness.Hence,AppealtoTraditionisasomewhat

commonfallacy.

Itshouldnotbeassumedthatnewthingsmustbebetterthanoldthings(seethe

fallacyAppealtoNovelty)anymorethanitshouldbeassumedthatoldthingsarebetter

thannewthings.Theageofthingdoesnot,ingeneral,haveanybearingonitsqualityor

correctness(inthiscontext).Inthecaseoftradition,assumingthatsomethingiscorrect

justbecauseitisconsideredatraditionispoorreasoning.Forexample,ifthebeliefthat

1+1=56wereatraditionofagroupofpeopleitwouldhardlyfollowthatitistrue.

Obviously,age

does

have

abearing

in

some

contexts.

For

example,

ifaperson

concludedthatagedwinewouldbebetterthanbrandnewwine,hewouldnotbe

committinganAppealtoTradition.Thisisbecause,insuchcasestheageofthethingis

relevanttoitsquality.Thus,thefallacyiscommittedonlywhentheageisnot,inandof

itself,relevanttotheclaim.

Onefinalissuethatmustbeconsideredisthetestoftime.Insomecasespeople

mightbeassumingthatbecausesomethinghaslastedasatraditionorhasbeenaround

alongtimethatitistruebecauseithaspassedthetestoftime.Ifapersonassumes


24/60


25/60


26/60


27/60

26

isthatthesemethods(whenusedproperly)willresultinasamplethatmatchesthe

wholepopulationfairlyclosely.Thethreetypesofsamplesareasfollows

RandomSample:Thisisasamplethatistakeninsuchawaythatnothingbutchance

determineswhichmembersofthepopulationareselectedforthesample.Ideally,any

individualmemberofthepopulationhasthesamechanceasbeingselectedasany

other.This

type

of

sample

avoids

being

biased

because

abiased

sample

is

one

that

is

takeninsuchawaythatsomemembersofthepopulationhaveasignificantlygreater

chanceofbeingselectedforthesamplethanothermembers.Unfortunately,creating

anidealrandomsampleisoftenverydifficult.

StratifiedSample:Thisisasamplethatistakenbyusingthefollowingsteps:1)The

relevantstrata(populationsubgroups)areidentified,2)Thenumberofmembersin

eachstratumisdeterminedand3)Arandomsampleistakenfromeachstratuminexact

proportiontoitssize.Thismethodisobviouslymostusefulwhendealingwithstratified

populations.Forexample,apersonsincomeofteninfluenceshowshevotes,sowhen

conductingapresidentialpollitwouldbeagoodideatotakeastratifiedsampleusing

economicclassesasthebasisfordeterminingthestrata.Thismethodavoidsloaded

samplesby(ideally)ensuringthateachstratumofthepopulationisadequately

represented.

TimeLapseSample:Thistypeofsampleistakenbytakingastratifiedorrandomsample

andthentakingatleastonemoresamplewithasignificantlapseoftimebetweenthem.

Afterthetwosamplesaretaken,theycanbecomparedforchanges.Thismethodof

sampletakingisveryimportantwhenmakingpredictions.Apredictionbasedononly

onesampleislikelytobeaHastyGeneralization(becausethesampleislikelytobetoo

smalltocoverpast,presentandfuturepopulations)oraBiasedSample(becausethe

samplewill

only

include

instances

from

one

time

period).

PeopleoftencommitBiasedSamplebecauseofbiasorprejudice.Forexample,a

personmightintentionallyorunintentionallyseekoutpeopleoreventsthatsupporthis

bias.Asanexample,apersonwhoispushingaparticularscientifictheorymighttendto

gathersamplesthatarebiasedinfavorofthattheory.

Peoplealsocommonlycommitthisfallacybecauseoflazinessorsloppiness.Itisvery

easytosimplytakeasamplefromwhathappenstobeeasilyavailableratherthan

takingthetimeandefforttogenerateanadequatesampleanddrawajustified

conclusion.

It

is

important

to

keep

in

mind

that

bias

is

relative

to

the

purpose

of

the

sample.

For

example,ifBillwantedtoknowwhatNRAmembersthoughtaboutaguncontrollaw,

thentakingasampleataNRAmeetingwouldnotbebiased.However,ifBillwantedto

determinewhatAmericansingeneralthoughtaboutthelaw,thenasampletakenatan

NRAmeetingwouldbebiased.


28/60

27

Example#1:

BillisassignedbyhiseditortodeterminewhatmostAmericansthinkaboutanewlaw

thatwillplaceafederaltaxonallmodemsandcomputerspurchased.Therevenues

fromthetaxwillbeusedtoenforcenewonlinedecencylaws.Bill,beingtechnically

inclined,decidestouseanemailpoll.Inhispoll,95%ofthosesurveyedopposedthe

tax.Bill

was

quite

surprised

when

65%

of

all

Americans

voted

for

the

taxes.

Example#2:

TheUnitedPacifistsofAmericadecidetorunapolltodeterminewhatAmericansthink

aboutgunsandguncontrol.Janeisassignedthetaskofsettingupthestudy.Tosave

mailingcosts,sheincludesthesurveyforminthegroupsnewslettermailing.Sheisvery

pleasedtofindoutthat95%ofthosesurveyedfavorguncontrollawsandshetellsher

friendsthatthevastmajorityofAmericansfavorguncontrollaws.

Example#3:

LargescalepollsweretakeninFlorida,California,andMaineanditwasfoundthatan

averageof55%ofthosepolledspentatleastfourteendaysayearneartheocean.So,it

canbesafelyconcludedthat55%ofallAmericansspendatleastfourteendaysnearthe

oceaneachyear.

BurdenofProofAlsoKnownAs:AppealtoIgnorance(AdIgnorantiam)

Description:

BurdenofProofisafallacyinwhichtheburdenofproofisplacedonthewrongside.

AnotherversionoccurswhenalackofevidenceforsideAistakentobeevidencefor

sideBincasesinwhichtheburdenofproofactuallyrestsonsideB.Acommonname

forthis

is

an

Appeal

to

Ignorance.

This

sort

of

reasoning

typically

has

the

following

form:

1.ClaimXispresentedbysideAandtheburdenofproofactuallyrestsonsideB.

2.SideBclaimsthatXisfalsebecausethereisnoproofforX.

Inmanysituations,onesidehastheburdenofproofrestingonit.Thissideisobligated

toprovideevidenceforitsposition.Theclaimoftheotherside,theonethatdoesnot

beartheburdenofproof,isassumedtobetrueunlessprovenotherwise.Thedifficulty

insuchcasesisdeterminingwhichside,ifany,theburdenofproofrestson.Inmany

cases,settlingthisissuecanbeamatterofsignificantdebate.Insomecasestheburden

ofproof

is

set

by

the

situation.

For

example,

in

American

law

aperson

is

assumed

to

be

innocentuntilprovenguilty(hencetheburdenofproofisontheprosecution).As

anotherexample,indebatetheburdenofproofisplacedontheaffirmativeteam.Asa

finalexample,inmostcasestheburdenofproofrestsonthosewhoclaimsomething

exists(suchasBigfoot,psychicpowers,universals,andsensedata).


29/60

28

Example#1:

Bill:Ithinkthatweshouldinvestmoremoneyinexpandingtheinterstatesystem.

Jill:Ithinkthatwouldbeabadidea,consideringthestateofthetreasury.

Bill:Howcananyonebeagainsthighwayimprovements?

Example#2:

Bill:Ithinkthatsomepeoplehavepsychicpowers.

Jill:Whatisyourproof?

Bill:Noonehasbeenabletoprovethatpeopledonothavepsychicpowers.

Example#3:

YoucannotprovethatGoddoesnotexist,soHedoes.

CircumstantialAdHominemDescription:

A

Circumstantial

ad

Hominem

is

a

fallacy

in

which

one

attempts

to

attack

a

claim

by

assertingthatthepersonmakingtheclaimismakingitsimplyoutofselfinterest.In

somecases,thisfallacyinvolvessubstitutinganattackonapersonscircumstances

(suchasthepersonsreligion,politicalaffiliation,ethnicbackground,etc.).Thefallacy

hasthefollowingforms:


2.PersonBassertsthatAmakesclaimXbecauseitisinAsinteresttoclaimX.

3.ThereforeclaimXisfalse.


2.Person

B

makes

an

attack

on

As

circumstances.

3.ThereforeXisfalse.

ACircumstantialadHominemisafallacybecauseapersonsinterestsand

circumstanceshavenobearingonthetruthorfalsityoftheclaimbeingmade.Whilea

personsinterestswillprovidethemwithmotivestosupportcertainclaims,theclaims

standorfallontheirown.Itisalsothecasethatapersonscircumstances(religion,

politicalaffiliation,etc.)donotaffectthetruthorfalsityoftheclaim.Thisismadequite

clearbythefollowingexample:Billclaimsthat1+1=2.ButheisaRepublican,sohis

claimisfalse.

Thereare

times

when

it

is

prudent

to

suspicious

of

apersons

claims,

such

as

when

it

is

evidentthattheclaimsarebeingbiasedbythepersonsinterests.Forexample,ifa

tobaccocompanyrepresentativeclaimsthattobaccodoesnotcausecancer,itwouldbe

prudenttonotsimplyaccepttheclaim.Thisisbecausethepersonhasamotivationto

maketheclaim,whetheritistrueornot.However,themerefactthatthepersonhasa

motivationtomaketheclaimdoesnotmakeitfalse.Forexample,supposeaparent

tellshersonthatstickingaforkinalightsocketwouldbedangerous.Simplybecause

shehasamotivationtosaythisobviouslydoesnotmakeherclaimfalse.


30/60

29

Example#1:

Sheassertsthatweneedmoremilitaryspending,butthatisfalse,sincesheisonly

sayingitbecausesheisaRepublican.

Example#2:

IthinkthatweshouldrejectwhatFatherJoneshastosayabouttheethicalissuesof

abortionbecauseheisaCatholicpriest.Afterall,FatherJonesisrequiredtoholdsuch

views.

Example#3:

OfcoursetheSenatorfromMaineopposesareductioninnavalspending.Afterall,

BathIronworks,whichproduceswarships,isinMaine.

Example#4:

Billclaimsthattaxbreaksforcorporationsincreasesdevelopment.Ofcourse,Billisthe

CEOofacorporation.

FallacyofCompositionDescription:

ThefallacyofCompositioniscommittedwhenaconclusionisdrawnaboutawhole

basedonthefeaturesofitsconstituentswhen,infact,nojustificationprovidedforthe

inference.Thereareactuallytwotypesofthisfallacy,bothofwhichareknownbythe

samename(becauseofthehighdegreeofsimilarity).

ThefirsttypeoffallacyofCompositionariseswhenapersonreasonsfromthe

characteristicsofindividualmembersofaclassorgrouptoaconclusionregardingthe

characteristicsof

the

entire

class

or

group

(taken

as

awhole).

More

formally,

the

reasoningwouldlooksomethinglikethis.

1.IndividualFthingshavecharacteristicsA,B,C,etc.

2.Therefore,the(whole)classofFthingshascharacteristicsA,B,C,etc.

Thislineofreasoningisfallaciousbecausethemerefactthatindividualshavecertain

characteristicsdoesnot,initself,guaranteethattheclass(takenasawhole)hasthose

characteristics.

Itisimportanttonotethatdrawinganinferenceaboutthecharacteristicsofaclass

basedon

the

characteristics

of

its

individual

members

is

not

always

fallacious.

In

some

cases,sufficientjustificationcanbeprovidedtowarranttheconclusion.Forexample,it

istruethatanindividualrichpersonhasmorewealththananindividualpoorperson.In

somenations(suchastheUS)itistruethattheclassofwealthypeoplehasmorewealth

asawholethandoestheclassofpoorpeople.Inthiscase,theevidenceusedwould

warranttheinferenceandthefallacyofCompositionwouldnotbecommitted.

ThesecondtypeoffallacyofCompositioniscommittedwhenitisconcludedthat

whatistrueofthepartsofawholemustbetrueofthewholewithouttherebeing


31/60

30

adequatejustificationfortheclaim.Moreformally,thelineofreasoningwouldbeas

follows:

1.ThepartsofthewholeXhavecharacteristicsA,B,C,etc.

2.ThereforethewholeXmusthavecharacteristicsA,B,C.

Thissortofreasoningisfallaciousbecauseitcannotbeinferredthatsimplybecause

thepartsofacomplexwholehave(orlack)certainpropertiesthatthewholethatthey

arepartsofhasthoseproperties.Thisisespeciallyclearinmath:Thenumbers1and3

arebothodd.1and3arepartsof4.Therefore,thenumber4isodd.

Itmustbenotedthatreasoningfromthepropertiesofthepartstothepropertiesof

thewholeisnotalwaysfallacious.Ifthereisjustificationfortheinferencefrompartsto

whole,thenthereasoningisnotfallacious.Forexample,ifeverypartofthehuman

bodyismadeofmatter,thenitwouldnotbeanerrorinreasoningtoconcludethatthe

wholehumanbodyismadeofmatter.Similarly,ifeverypartofastructureismadeof

brick,thereisnofallacycommittedwhenoneconcludesthatthewholestructureis

madeofbrick.

Example#1:

Amainbattletankusesmorefuelthanacar.Therefore,themainbattletanksuseup

moreoftheavailablefuelintheworldthandoallthecars.

Example#2:

Atigereatsmorefoodthanahumanbeing.Therefore,tigers,asagroup,eatmorefood

thandoallthehumansontheearth.

Example#3:

Atomsarecolorless.Catsaremadeofatoms,socatsarecolorless.

Example#4:

Everyplayerontheteamisasuperstarandagreatplayer,sotheteamisagreatteam.

Thisisfallacioussincethesuperstarsmightnotbeabletoplaytogetherverywelland

hencetheycouldbealousyteam.

Example#5:

Eachpartoftheshow,fromthespecialeffectstotheactingisamasterpiece.So,the

whole

show

is

a

masterpiece.

This

is

fallacious

since

a

show

could

have

great

acting,

greatspecialeffectsandsuch,yetstillfailtocometogethertomakeamasterpiece.

Example#6:

Comeon,youlikebeef,potatoes,andgreenbeans,soyouwilllikethisbeef,potato,and

greenbeencasserole.Thisisfallaciousforthesamereasonthatthefollowingis

fallacious:Youlikeeggs,icecream,pizza,cake,fish,jello,chicken,tacosauce,soda,


32/60

31

oranges,milk,eggrolls,andyogurtsoyoumustlikethisyummydishmadeoutofallof

them.

Example#7:

Sodiumandchlorinearebothdangeroustohumans.Thereforeanycombinationof

sodiumand

chlorine

will

be

dangerous

to

humans.

ConfusingCauseandEffectAlsoKnownas:QuestionableCause,ReversingCausation

Description:

ConfusingCauseandEffectisafallacythathasthefollowinggeneralform:

1)AandBregularlyoccurtogether.

2)ThereforeAisthecauseofB.

This

fallacy

requires

that

there

not

be,

in

fact,

a

common

cause

that

actually

causes

bothAandB.

Thisfallacyiscommittedwhenapersonassumesthatoneeventmustcauseanother

justbecausetheeventsoccurtogether.Moreformally,thisfallacyinvolvesdrawingthe

conclusionthatAisthecauseofBsimplybecauseAandBareinregularconjunction

(andthereisnotacommoncausethatisactuallythecauseofAandB).Themistake

beingmadeisthatthecausalconclusionisbeingdrawnwithoutadequatejustification.

Insomecasesitwillbeevidentthatthefallacyisbeingcommitted.Forexample,a

personmightclaimthatanillnesswascausedbyapersongettingafever.Inthiscase,it

wouldbequiteclearthatthefeverwascausedbyillnessandnottheotherwayaround.

Inothercases,thefallacyisnotalwaysevident.Onefactorthatmakescausalreasoning

quitedifficult

is

that

it

is

not

always

evident

what

is

the

cause

and

what

is

the

effect.

For

example,aproblemchildmightbethecauseoftheparentsbeingshorttemperedorthe

shorttemperoftheparentsmightbethecauseofthechildbeingproblematic.The

difficultyisincreasedbythefactthatsomesituationsmightinvolvefeedback.For

example,theparentstempermightcausethechildtobecomeproblematicandthe

childsbehaviorcouldworsentheparentstemper.Insuchcasesitcouldberather

difficulttosortoutwhatcausedwhatinthefirstplace.

Inordertodeterminethatthefallacyhasbeencommitted,itmustbeshownthatthe

causalconclusionhasnotbeenadequatelysupportedandthatthepersoncommitting

thefallacyhasconfusedtheactualcausewiththeeffect.Showingthatthefallacyhas

beencommitted

will

typically

involve

determining

the

actual

cause

and

the

actual

effect.Insomecases,asnotedabove,thiscanbequiteeasy.Inothercasesitwillbe

difficult.Insomecases,itmightbealmostimpossible.Anotherthingthatmakescausal

reasoningdifficultisthatpeopleoftenhaveverydifferentconceptionsofcauseand,in

somecases,theissuesarecloudedbyemotionsandideologies.Forexample,people

oftenclaimviolenceonTVandinmoviesmustbecensoredbecauseitcausespeopleto

likeviolence.OtherpeopleclaimthatthereisviolenceonTVandinmoviesbecause


33/60

32

peoplelikeviolence.Inthiscase,itisnotobviouswhatthecausereallyisandtheissue

iscloudedbythefactthatemotionsoftenrunhighonthisissue.

Whilecausalreasoningcanbedifficult,manyerrorscanbeavoidedwithduecareand

carefultestingprocedures.Thisisduetothefactthatthefallacyarisesbecausethe

conclusionisdrawnwithoutduecare.Onewaytoavoidthefallacyistopaycareful

attentionto

the

temporal

sequence

of

events.

Since

(outside

of

Star

Trek),

effects

do

notgenerallyprecedetheircauses,ifAoccursafterB,thenAcannotbethecauseofB.

However,thesemethodsgobeyondthescopeofthisprogram.

Allcausalfallaciesinvolveanerrorincausalreasoning.However,thisfallacydiffers

fromtheothercausalfallaciesintermsoftheerrorinreasoningbeingmade.Inthecase

ofaPostHocfallacy,theerroristhatapersonisacceptingthatAisthecauseofB

simplybecauseAoccursbeforeB.InthecaseoftheFallacyofIgnoringaCommonCause

AistakentobethecauseofBwhenthereis,infact,athirdfactorthatisthecauseof

bothAandB.Formoreinformation,seetherelevantentriesinthisprogram.

Example#1:

BillandJoearehavingadebateaboutmusicandmoraldecay:

Bill:Itseemscleartomethatthisnewmusiciscausingtheyouthtobecomecorrupt.

Joe:Whatdoyoumean?

Bill:Thisrapstuffisalwaystellingthekidstokillcops,dodrugs,andabusewomen.

Thatisallbadandthekidstodayshouldntbedoingthatsortofstuff.Weoughttoban

thatmusic!

Joe:So,youthinkthatgettingridoftherapmusicwouldsolvethedrug,violenceand

sexismproblemsintheUS?

Bill:Well,itwouldntgetridofitall,butitwouldtakecareofalotofit.

Joe:Dontyouthinkthatmostoftherapsingerssingaboutthatsortofstuffbecause

thatis

what

is

really

going

on

these

days?

Imean,

people

often

sing

about

the

conditionsoftheirtime,justlikethepeopledidinthesixties.ButthenIsupposethat

youthinkthatpeoplewereagainstthewarandintodrugsjustbecausetheylistenedto

DylanandBaez.

Bill:Well

Joe:Well,itseemstomethatthemaincauseofthecontentoftherapmusicisthe

preexistingsocialconditions.Iftherewerentalltheseproblems,therapsingers

probablywouldntbesingingaboutthem.Ialsothinkthatifthesocialconditionswere

great,kidscouldlistentothemusicalldayandnotbeaffected.

Joe:Well,Istillthinktherapmusiccausestheproblems.Youcantargueagainstthe

fact

that

social

ills

really

picked

up

at

the

same

time

rap

music

got

started.

Example#2:

Itisclaimedbysomepeoplethatsevereillnessiscausedbydepressionandanger.After

all,peoplewhoareseverelyillareveryoftendepressedandangry.Thus,itfollowsthat

thecauseofsevereillnessactuallyisthedepressionandanger.So,agoodandcheerful

attitudeiskeytostayinghealthy.


34/60


35/60

34

backedbyevidence,thenthereasoningcanbefine.Forexample,itisnotfallaciousto

inferthatBilltheSiamesecatisamammalfromthefactthatallcatsaremammals.In

thiscase,whatistrueoftheclassisalsotrueofeachindividualmember.

Example#1:

Theball

is

blue,

therefore

the

atoms

that

make

it

up

are

also

blue.

Example#2:

Alivingcellisorganicmaterial,sothechemicalsmakingupthecellmustalsobe

organicmaterial.

Example#3:

Billlivesinalargebuilding,sohisapartmentmustbelarge.

Example#4:

Sodiumchloride(tablesalt)maybesafelyeaten.Thereforeitsconstituentelements,

sodiumandchlorine,maybesafelyeaten.

Example#5:

AmericansusemuchmoreelectricitythanAfricansdo.SoBill,wholivesinprimitive

cabininMaine,usesmoreelectricitythanNelson,wholivesinamodernhouseinSouth

Africa.

Example#6:

Menreceivemorehighereducationthanwomen.ThereforeDr.JaneSmarthasless

highereducationthanMr.BillBuffoon.

Example#7:

MinoritiesgetpaidlessthanwhitesinAmerica.Therefore,theblackCEOofamulti

billiondollarcompanygetspaidlessthanthewhitejanitorwhocleanshisoffice.

FalseDilemmaAlsoKnownas:Black&WhiteThinking

Description:

AFalseDilemmaisafallacyinwhichapersonusesthefollowingpatternof

reasoning:

1.EitherclaimXistrueorclaimYistrue(whenXandYcouldbothbefalse).

2.ClaimYisfalse.

3.ThereforeclaimXistrue.

Thislineofreasoningisfallaciousbecauseifbothclaimscouldbefalse,thenit

cannotbeinferredthatoneistruebecausetheotherisfalse.Thatthisisthecaseis

madeclearbythefollowingexample:


36/60

35

1.Either1+1=4or1+1=12.

2.Itisnotthecasethat1+1=4.

3.Therefore1+1=12.

Incases

in

which

the

two

options

are,

in

fact,

the

only

two

options,

this

line

of

reasoningisnotfallacious.Forexample:

1.Billisdeadorheisalive.

2.Billisnotdead.

3.ThereforeBillisalive.

Example#1:

SenatorJill:Wellhavetocuteducationfundingthisyear.

SenatorBillWhy?

SenatorJill:Well,eitherwecutthesocialprogramsofwelivewithahugedeficitand

wecantlivewiththedeficit.

Example#2:

Bill:JillandIbothsupporthavingprayerinpublicschools.

Jill:Hey,Ineversaidthat!

Bill:YourenotanatheistareyouJill?

Example#3:

Look,youaregoingtohavetomakeupyourmind.Eitheryoudecidethatyoucan

affordthis

stereo,

or

you

decide

you

are

going

to

do

without

music

for

awhile.

GamblersFallacyDescription:

TheGamblersFallacyiscommittedwhenapersonassumesthatadeparturefrom

whatoccursonaverageorinthelongtermwillbecorrectedintheshortterm.Theform

ofthefallacyisasfollows:

1.Xhashappened.

2.Xdepartsfromwhatisexpectedtooccuronaverageoroverthelongterm.

3.Therefore,

Xwill

come

to

an

end

soon.

Therearetwocommonwaysthisfallacyiscommitted.Inbothcasesapersonis

assumingthatsomeresultmustbeduesimplybecausewhathaspreviouslyhappened

departsfromwhatwouldbeexpectedonaverageoroverthelongterm.

Thefirstinvolveseventswhoseprobabilitiesofoccurringareindependentofone

another.Forexample,onetossofafair(twosides,nonloaded)coindoesnotaffectthe

nexttossofthecoin.So,eachtimethecoinistossedthereis(ideally)a50%chanceofit


37/60

36

landingheadsanda50%chanceofitlandingtails.Supposethatapersontossesacoin6

timesandgetsaheadeachtime.Ifheconcludesthatthenexttosswillbetailsbecause

tailsisdue,thenhewillhavecommittedtheGamblersFallacy.Thisisbecausethe

resultsofprevioustosseshavenobearingontheoutcomeofthe7thtoss.Ithasa50%

chanceofbeingheadsanda50%chanceofbeingtails,justlikeanyothertoss.

Thesecond

involves

cases

whose

probabilities

of

occurring

are

not

independent

of

oneanother.Forexample,supposethataboxerhaswon50%ofhisfightsoverthepast

twoyears.Supposethatafterseveralfightshehaswon50%ofhismatchesthisyear,

thathehislosthislastsixfightsandhehassixleft.Ifapersonbelievedthathewould

winhisnextsixfightsbecausehehasuseduphislossesandisdueforavictory,then

hewouldhavecommittedtheGamblersFallacy.Afterall,thepersonwouldbeignoring

thefactthattheresultsofonematchcaninfluencetheresultsofthenextone.For

example,theboxermighthavebeeninjuredinonematchwhichwouldlowerhis

chancesofwinninghislastsixfights.

Itshouldbenotedthatnotallpredictionsaboutwhatislikelytooccurarefallacious.If

apersonhasgoodevidenceforhispredictions,thentheywillbereasonabletoaccept.

Forexample,ifapersontossesafaircoinandgetsnineheadsinarowitwouldbe

reasonableforhimtoconcludethathewillprobablynotgetanothernineinarow

again.Thisreasoningwouldnotbefallaciousaslongashebelievedhisconclusion

becauseofanunderstandingofthelawsofprobability.Inthiscase,ifheconcludedthat

hewouldnotgetanothernineheadsinarowbecausetheoddsofgettingnineheadsin

arowarelowerthangettingfewerthannineheadsinarow,thenhisreasoningwould

begoodandhisconclusionwouldbejustified.Hence,determiningwhetherornotthe

GamblersFallacyisbeingcommittedoftenrequiressomebasicunderstandingofthe

lawsofprobability.

Example#1:

BillisplayingagainstDouginaWWIItankbattlegame.Doughashadagreatstreakof

luckandhasbeenkillingBillstanksleftandrightwithgooddierolls.Bill,whohasa

fewtanksleft,decidestoriskallinadesperateattackonDoug.Heisabitworriedthat

Dougmightwipehimout,buthethinksthatsinceDougsluckatrollinghasbeengreat

Dougmustbedueforsomebaddicerolls.BilllauncheshisattackandDougbutchershis

forces.

Example#2:

JaneandBillaretalking:

Jane:IllbeabletobuythatcarIalwayswantedsoon.

Bill:Why,didyougetaraise?

Jane:No.ButyouknowhowIvebeenplayingthelotteryalltheseyears?

Bill:Yes,youbuyaticketforeverydrawing,withoutfail.

Jane:AndIvelosteverytime.

Bill:Sowhydoyouthinkyouwillwinthistime?

Jane:Well,afterallthoselossesImdueforawin.


38/60

37

Example#3:

JoeandSamareattheracetrackbettingonhorses.

Joe:Youseethathorseoverthere?Helosthislastfourraces.Imgoingtobetonhim.

Sam:Why?

Ithink

he

will

probably

lose.

Joe:Noway,Sam.Ilookedupthehorsesstatsandhehaswonhalfhisracesinthe

pasttwoyears.Sincehehaslostthreeofhislastfourraces,hellhavetowinthisrace.

SoImbettingthefarmonhim.

Sam:Areyousure?

Joe:OfcourseImsure.Thatponyisdue,manhesdue!

GeneticFallacyDescription:

AGeneticFallacyisalineofreasoninginwhichaperceiveddefectintheoriginofa

claim

or

thing

is

taken

to

be

evidence

that

discredits

the

claim

or

thing

itself.

It

is

also

a

lineofreasoninginwhichtheoriginofaclaimorthingistakentobeevidenceforthe

claimorthing.Thissortofreasoninghasthefollowingform:

1.Theoriginofaclaimorthingispresented.

2.Theclaimistrue(orfalse)orthethingissupported(ordiscredited).

Itisclearthatsortofreasoningisfallacious.Forexample:Billclaimsthat1+1=2.

However,myparentsbroughtmeuptobelievethat1+1=254,soBillmustbewrong.

Itshouldbenotedthattherearesomecasesinwhichtheoriginofaclaimisrelevant

tothetruthorfalsityoftheclaim.Forexample,aclaimthatcomesfromareliable

expertis

likely

to

be

true

(provided

it

is

in

her

area

of

expertise).

Example#1:

Yeah,theenvironmentalistsdoclaimthatoverdevelopmentcanleadtoallkindsof

seriousproblems.Butweallknowaboutthosedarnbunnyhuggersandtheirsilly

views!.

Example#2:

IwasbroughtuptobelieveinGod,andmyparentstoldmeGodexists,soHemust.

Example#3:

Sure,themediaclaimsthatSenatorBedfellowwastakingkickbacks.Butweallknow

aboutthemediascredibility,dontwe.


39/60

38

GuiltbyAssociationAlsoKnownas:BadCompanyFallacy,CompanythatYouKeepFallacy

Description:

GuiltbyAssociationisafallacyinwhichapersonrejectsaclaimsimplybecauseitis

pointedoutthatpeopleshedislikesaccepttheclaim.Thissortofreasoninghasthe

followingform:

1.ItispointedoutthatpersonAacceptsclaimP.

2.ThereforePisfalse

Itisclearthatsortofreasoningisfallacious.Forexamplethefollowingisobviouslya

caseofpoorreasoning:Youthinkthat1+1=2.But,AdolfHitler,CharlesManson,

JosephStalin,andTedBundyallbelievedthat1+1=2.So,youshouldntbelieveit.

Thefallacydrawsitspowerfromthefactthatpeopledonotliketobeassociatedwith

peopletheydislike.Hence,ifitisshownthatapersonsharesabeliefwithpeoplehe

dislikes

he

might

be

influenced

into

rejecting

that

belief.

In

such

cases

the

person

will

be

rejectingtheclaimbasedonhowhethinksorfeelsaboutthepeoplewhoholditand

becausehedoesnotwanttobeassociatedwithsuchpeople.

Ofcourse,thefactthatsomeonedoesnotwanttobeassociatedwithpeopleshe

dislikesdoesnotjustifytherejectionofanyclaim.Forexample,mostwickedand

terriblepeopleacceptthattheearthrevolvesaroundthesunandthatleadisheavier

thanhelium.Nosanepersonwouldrejecttheseclaimssimplybecausethiswouldput

theminthecompanyofpeopletheydislike(orevenhate).

Example#1:

WillandKiteenaarearguingoversocialism.Kiteenaisapacifistandhatesviolenceand

violentpeople.

Kiteena:IthinkthattheUnitedStatesshouldcontinuetoadoptsocialistprograms.For

example,Ithinkthatthegovernmentshouldtakecontrolofvitalindustries.

Will:So,youareforstateownershipofindustry.

Kiteena:Certainly.Itisagreatideaandwillhelpmaketheworldalessviolentplace.

Will:Well,youknowStalinalsoendorsedstateownershiponindustry.Atlastcounthe

wipedoutmillionsofhisownpeople.PolPotofCambodiawasalsoforstateownership

ofindustry.Healsokilledmillionsofhisownpeople.TheleadershipofChinaisforstate

ownedindustry.Theykilledtheirownpeopleinthatsquare.So,areyoustillforstate

ownershipof

industry?

Kiteena:Oh,no!Idontwanttobeassociatedwiththosebutchers!

Example#2:

JenandSandyarediscussingthetopicofwelfare.Jenisfairlyconservativepoliticallybut

shehasbeenanactiveopponentofracism.Sandyisextremelyliberalpolitically.


40/60

39

Jen:IwasreadingoversomeprivatestudiesofwelfareandIthinkitwouldbebetterto

havepeopleworkfortheirwelfare.Forexample,peoplecouldpickuptrash,putup

signs,andmaybeevendoskilledlaborthattheyarequalifiedfor.Thiswouldprobably

makepeoplefeelbetteraboutthemselvesanditwouldgetmoreoutofourtaxmoney.

Sandy:Isee.So,youwanttohavethepoorpeopleoutonthestreetspickinguptrash

fortheir

checks?

Well,

you

know

that

is

exactly

the

position

David

Count

endorses.

Jen:Whoishe?

Sandy:Imsurprisedyoudontknowhim,seeinghowalikeyoutwoare.Hewasa

GrandMookyWizardfortheAryanPureWhiteLeagueandiswellknownforhishatred

ofblacksandotherminorities.Withyourviews,youdfitrightintohislittleracistclub.

Jen:So,IshouldrejectmyviewjustbecauseIshareitwithsomeracist?

Sandy:Ofcourse.

Example#3:

LibardandFerrisarediscussingwhotheyaregoingtovoteforasthenextdepartment

chairinthephilosophydepartment.LibardisaradicalfeministandshedespisesWayne

andBill,whoaretwosexistprofessorsinthedepartment.

Ferris:So,whoareyougoingtovotefor?

Libard:Well,IwasthinkingaboutvotingforJane,sincesheisawomanandtherehas

neverbeenawomanchairhere.But,IthinkthatStevewilldoanexcellentjob.Hehasa

lotofcloutintheuniversityandheisadecentperson.

Ferris:Youknow,WayneandBillaresupportinghim.Theyreallyliketheideaofhaving

Steveasthenewchair.IneverthoughtIdseeyouandthosetwopigsonthesame

side.

Libard:Well,maybeitistimethatwehaveawomanaschair.

HastyGeneralizationAlsoKnownas:FallacyofInsufficientStatistics,FallacyofInsufficientSample,Leapingto

AConclusion,HastyInduction

Description:

Thisfallacyiscommittedwhenapersondrawsaconclusionaboutapopulationbased

onasamplethatisnotlargeenough.Ithasthefollowingform:

1.Sample

S,

which

is

too

small,

is

taken

from

population

P.

2.ConclusionCisdrawnaboutPopulationPbasedonS.

Thepersoncommittingthefallacyismisusingthefollowingtypeofreasoning,whichis

knownvariouslyasInductiveGeneralization,Generalization,andStatistical

Generalization:


41/60

40

1.X%ofallobservedAsareBs.

2.ThereforeX%ofallAsareBs.

ThefallacyiscommittedwhennotenoughAsareobservedtowarranttheconclusion.

IfenoughAsareobservedthenthereasoningisnotfallacious.

Smallsamples

will

tend

to

be

unrepresentative.

As

ablatant

case,

asking

one

person

whatshethinksaboutguncontrolwouldclearlynotprovideanadequatesizedsample

fordeterminingwhatCanadiansingeneralthinkabouttheissue.Thegeneralideais

thatsmallsamplesarelesslikelytocontainnumbersproportionaltothewhole

population.Forexample,ifabucketcontainsblue,red,greenandorangemarbles,then

asampleofthreemarblescannotpossibleberepresentativeofthewholepopulationof

marbles.Asthesamplesizeofmarblesincreasesthemorelikelyitbecomesthat

marblesofeachcolorwillbeselectedinproportiontotheirnumbersinthewhole

population.Thesameholdstrueforthingsothersthanmarbles,suchaspeopleand

theirpoliticalviews.

SinceHastyGeneralizationiscommittedwhenthesample(theobservedinstances)is

toosmall,itisimportanttohavesamplesthatarelargeenoughwhenmakinga

generalization.Themostreliablewaytodothisistotakeaslargeasampleasis

practical.Therearenofixednumbersastowhatcountsasbeinglargeenough.Ifthe

populationinquestionisnotverydiverse(apopulationofclonedmice,forexample)

thenaverysmallsamplewouldsuffice.Ifthepopulationisverydiverse(people,for

example)thenafairlylargesamplewouldbeneeded.Thesizeofthesamplealso

dependsonthesizeofthepopulation.Obviously,averysmallpopulationwillnot

supportahugesample.Finally,therequiredsizewilldependonthepurposeofthe

sample.IfBillwantstoknowwhatJoeandJanethinkaboutguncontrol,thenasample

consistingofBillandJanewould(obviously)belargeenough.IfBillwantstoknowwhat

mostAustralians

think

about

gun

control,

then

asample

consisting

of

Bill

and

Jane

wouldbefartoosmall.

PeopleoftencommitHastyGeneralizationsbecauseofbiasorprejudice.Forexample,

someonewhoisasexistmightconcludethatallwomenareunfittoflyjetfighters

becauseonewomancrashedone.PeoplealsocommonlycommitHastyGeneralizations

becauseoflazinessorsloppiness.Itisveryeasytosimplyleaptoaconclusionandmuch

hardertogatheranadequatesampleanddrawajustifiedconclusion.Thus,avoiding

thisfallacyrequiresminimizingtheinfluenceofbiasandtakingcaretoselectasample

thatislargeenough.

Onefinalpoint:aHastyGeneralization,likeanyfallacy,mighthaveatrueconclusion.

However,

as

long

as

the

reasoning

is

fallacious

there

is

no

reason

to

accept

the

conclusionbasedonthatreasoning.

Example#1:

Smith,whoisfromEngland,decidestoattendgraduateschoolatOhioStateUniversity.

HehasneverbeentotheUSbefore.Thedayafterhearrives,heiswalkingbackfroman

orientationsessionandseestwowhite(albino)squirrelschasingeachotherarounda

tree.Inhisnextletterhome,hetellshisfamilythatAmericansquirrelsarewhite.


42/60

41

Example#2:

SamisridingherbikeinherhometowninMaine,mindingherownbusiness.Astation

wagoncomesupbehindherandthedriverstartsbeepinghishornandthentriesto

forceherofftheroad.Ashegoesby,thedriveryellsgetonthesidewalkwhereyou

belong!Sam

sees

that

the

car

has

Ohio

plates

and

concludes

that

all

Ohio

drivers

42-Fallacies of Ethics

Documents

Transcript of 42-Fallacies of Ethics